Converting in RAW vs Exposure compensation

william_cpa wrote: She unleashed a tirade of abuse and hung up the phone so I never found out.

Okay, wow. Not much to say to that.

Since then I have had a couple of people walk out of the beginner class at lunch time after them telling me that they 'only shoot in manual' and me asking them why. When people tell me this I am genuinely interested in finding out why they do it but they never seem to have an answer to give me other than getting pissed.

You have people sign up for a "beginner class" and expect to be shooting manual from day one?  WT..? Sounds like miscommunication or poorly set expectations to me.

I shoot manual because I can. I started with a flexible Pany Lumix that was always in Auto while I learned about composition, developed my eye, and explored my perception of the world. Over the course of several years I learned about the exposure triangle and took some control over what the camera was doing, until I outgrew the camera. Fast forward several years (2012) and I was able to buy a decent camera. I swore I would complete my education by staying in MM. I do not like the camera to make decisions for me, whether it's aperture, SS, or image processing. It's job is to capture the image I have in mind. The camera, like a musical instrument, becomes an extension of me. I believe that as you grow as a photographer you will find more and more things that you want to control (and not just in the camera). MM is just part of that. But I didn't start there, which was one of the things that put me off of photography for so many years. Well, that and the expense of film.

My only issue with "auto" is when folks purport to be capturing images of quality when all they are really taking is snapshots. That's fine, just don't fool yourself. If auto mode could read my mind, we'll then, we'd have something, wouldn't we?

garyrhook wrote:

william_cpa wrote: She unleashed a tirade of abuse and hung up the phone so I never found out.

Okay, wow. Not much to say to that.

Since then I have had a couple of people walk out of the beginner class at lunch time after them telling me that they 'only shoot in manual' and me asking them why. When people tell me this I am genuinely interested in finding out why they do it but they never seem to have an answer to give me other than getting pissed.

You have people sign up for a "beginner class" and expect to be shooting manual from day one?  WT..? Sounds like miscommunication or poorly set expectations to me.

I shoot manual because I can. I started with a flexible Pany Lumix that was always in Auto while I learned about composition, developed my eye, and explored my perception of the world. Over the course of several years I learned about the exposure triangle and took some control over what the camera was doing, until I outgrew the camera. Fast forward several years (2012) and I was able to buy a decent camera. I swore I would complete my education by staying in MM. I do not like the camera to make decisions for me, whether it's aperture, SS, or image processing. It's job is to capture the image I have in mind. The camera, like a musical instrument, becomes an extension of me. I believe that as you grow as a photographer you will find more and more things that you want to control (and not just in the camera). MM is just part of that. But I didn't start there, which was one of the things that put me off of photography for so many years. Well, that and the expense of film.

My only issue with "auto" is when folks purport to be capturing images of quality when all they are really taking is snapshots. That's fine, just don't fool yourself. If auto mode could read my mind, we'll then, we'd have something, wouldn't we?

Excellent. Now, perhaps, you might assist me in discovering the purpose of shooting in MM, assuming there is no incident meter in the kit.

I know that there are laws of physics and they cannot be changed by rotating the mode dial. What are you getting in MM that is not available in Aperture Priority?

BTW folks who say they are shooting in MM in our beginner class are, without exception, complete beginners.

BTW folks who say they are shooting in MM in our beginner class are, without exception, complete beginners.

I'll start here and suggest that, instead of insisting they only shoot in MM, that their goal is to learn to shoot only in MM. Me thinks if they already knew how they'd not be taking a beginner's class.

Excellent. Now, perhaps, you might assist me in discovering the purpose of shooting in MM, assuming there is no incident meter in the kit.

I know that there are laws of physics and they cannot be changed by rotating the mode dial. What are you getting in MM that is not available in Aperture Priority?

I'm just kinda going backwards here, for some reason...

There's a meter in the camera which helps me get my exposure where I need it to be.

My reasoning is quite simple (to me). If I used AP, the camera would select SS and ISO. If I used SP, the camera would select ISO and aperture. I choose aperture and SS first, and adjust ISO accordingly. Only after I work that out do I tweak SS and aperture if necessary. This approach (and only this approach) allows me to fulfill my vision. There's no mode that does this, as far as I know. Therefore I am left with MM.

So, yeah, maybe it's just control issues. But being a technical person (I have a day job) I can talk about this and associated issues all day long.

garyrhook wrote:
There's a meter in the camera which helps me get my exposure where I need it to be.

My reasoning is quite simple (to me). If I used AP, the camera would select SS and ISO. If I used SP, the camera would select ISO and aperture. I choose aperture and SS first, and adjust ISO accordingly. Only after I work that out do I tweak SS and aperture if necessary. This approach (and only this approach) allows me to fulfill my vision. There's no mode that does this, as far as I know. Therefore I am left with MM.

So, yeah, maybe it's just control issues. But being a technical person (I have a day job) I can talk about this and associated issues all day long.

Aperture priority mode changes the shutter speed only, it does this to match what the meter says is correct. If you chase the meter in manual mode you are doing what the camera does for you in aperture priority. If you are using the meter in the camera to set your shutter speed and aperture values you are only mimicking aperture priority (or shutter priority) but taking much longer to do it.

It is of no importance to me which mode you shoot in. Not my business. I just thought I would learn some new piece of information about why some people choose manual mode and, maybe, I am out of luck today. Thanks for the explanation.

william_cpa wrote:

garyrhook wrote:
There's a meter in the camera which helps me get my exposure where I need it to be.

My reasoning is quite simple (to me). If I used AP, the camera would select SS and ISO. If I used SP, the camera would select ISO and aperture. I choose aperture and SS first, and adjust ISO accordingly. Only after I work that out do I tweak SS and aperture if necessary. This approach (and only this approach) allows me to fulfill my vision. There's no mode that does this, as far as I know. Therefore I am left with MM.

So, yeah, maybe it's just control issues. But being a technical person (I have a day job) I can talk about this and associated issues all day long.

Aperture priority mode changes the shutter speed only, it does this to match what the meter says is correct. If you chase the meter in manual mode you are doing what the camera does for you in aperture priority. If you are using the meter in the camera to set your shutter speed and aperture values you are only mimicking aperture priority (or shutter priority) but taking much longer to do it.

It is of no importance to me which mode you shoot in. Not my business. I just thought I would learn some new piece of information about why some people choose manual mode and, maybe, I am out of luck today. Thanks for the explanation.

For me, I choose the shutter speed I want and the aperture I want then adjust ISO.  Hence, I might just use auto ISO instead (if I can limit how high it goes).  I'll shoot 6400 iso without worrying.  I'm not scared of a little grain... or auto modes.  

My issue is getting the shutter speed I need and not having the camera go too slow (and getting the aperture/DOF I want). 

Also I don't want the shutter speed suddenly dropping because the camera has been fooled by a dark background or whatever. 

Stealthy Ninja wrote: For me, I choose the shutter speed I want and the aperture I want then adjust ISO.

Isn't that what I wrote? I don't know how I can make it any plainer.

The camera doesn't know what the hell I want. Why would I let it make any of the decisions? Why is that so difficult to understand? There is no mode other than manual that achieves that.

Let go my ears I know what I'm doing.

Also I don't want the shutter speed suddenly dropping because the camera has been fooled by a dark background or whatever. 

And there's that, too. The camera doesn't always make the right choice.

Honestly, and with apologies, I'm going to get myself into trouble here. I would be leery of any instructor that was unable to clearly elucidate all modes on a digital camera and be able to thoroughly and reasonably discuss when, where, and how any of them might or might not be appropriate or useful. I can do that.

It's the same old aggressive, defensive responses. I had thought that you would be bringing something new to the topic. I apologize for asking. I won't be adding to this thread any further.

Any aggression perceived in my personal response to the topic is just perceived. I am as cool and calm about this as humanly possible.

Gary get's riled up occasionally. That's part of his charm.

Though be careful Gary, keep the argument based on the topic. Attack the argument not the man.

Also when you (william) said: "I just thought I would learn some new piece of information about why some people choose manual mode and, maybe, I am out of luck today. Thanks for the explanation." it was a tad passive aggressive... we're all guilty of being aggressive/defensive about certain issues.  So long as we attack the issue and not the man.

Anyway, I think William was just trying to get a discussion going. I'm sure he is more than capable of telling the benefits of all modes available.

Peace and love my brothers (and sisters)

Well this was very good information!  Thank you!

william_cpa wrote: It's the same old aggressive, defensive responses. I had thought that you would be bringing something new to the topic. I apologize for asking. I won't be adding to this thread any further.

 
In forums you have to be very thick skinned.
Now as to why some of us prefer to shoot in manual only is, because it is what we like, and because we know that we know better than the manufacturer. I think I used Aperture Mode like 3, or 4 years ago. With my Nikon it Over Exposes in bright lighting conditions, so I either have you use EC to compensate for it, or better yet, I use Manual Mode without EC, and expose it correctly by under exposing it.
So my question is which is easier in reality?
Me having to set the EC for a mode to get proper exposure, or being able to do it as I shoot? Also if as Adrian pointed out if I want to maintain a certain SS range, with a given Aperture/s, then the only thing I have to do is change the ISO. Or actually start with a higher ISO, especially true if you are dealing with changing lighting conditions.
The reason I use MM all the time is that it makes me feel as though I am a part of the process in making an image. Or actually that I am making the image how I want it. Maybe that is the old film shooter in me, in that I never needed all of the camera helping me outside of some having meters. When AF first came along, I never even got into that. Until I went digital I was shooting with my Pentax MX. The only thing that the battery is for is the meter. So I find it strange you wonder why some of us only like that way of shooting.
I do not care how you shoot, or what you shoot with. But you also have your own air of abrasiveness towards those of us who think the Auto Modes are crap. There is room for everyone to shoot how they like to, without thinking one group are snobs, or elitists for choosing to shoot MM. Or for those of us as MM shooters to see those who use those Modes as inferior. All that matters in the end is the images we get, and that we enjoy photography.

Joves wrote:

william_cpa wrote: It's the same old aggressive, defensive responses. I had thought that you would be bringing something new to the topic. I apologize for asking. I won't be adding to this thread any further.

 
In forums you have to be very thick skinned.
Now as to why some of us prefer to shoot in manual only is, because it is what we like, and because we know that we know better than the manufacturer. I think I used Aperture Mode like 3, or 4 years ago. With my Nikon it Over Exposes in bright lighting conditions, so I either have you use EC to compensate for it, or better yet, I use Manual Mode without EC, and expose it correctly by under exposing it.
So my question is which is easier in reality?
Me having to set the EC for a mode to get proper exposure, or being able to do it as I shoot? Also if as Adrian pointed out if I want to maintain a certain SS range, with a given Aperture/s, then the only thing I have to do is change the ISO. Or actually start with a higher ISO, especially true if you are dealing with changing lighting conditions.
The reason I use MM all the time is that it makes me feel as though I am a part of the process in making an image. Or actually that I am making the image how I want it. Maybe that is the old film shooter in me, in that I never needed all of the camera helping me outside of some having meters. When AF first came along, I never even got into that. Until I went digital I was shooting with my Pentax MX. The only thing that the battery is for is the meter. So I find it strange you wonder why some of us only like that way of shooting.
I do not care how you shoot, or what you shoot with. But you also have your own air of abrasiveness towards those of us who think the Auto Modes are crap. There is room for everyone to shoot how they like to, without thinking one group are snobs, or elitists for choosing to shoot MM. Or for those of us as MM shooters to see those who use those Modes as inferior. All that matters in the end is the images we get, and that we enjoy photography.

OK I'm back. I got suckered into this reply. Again an aggressive response above. I don't care what anyone posts, aggressive or otherwise. I am just disappointed that some will seek to drag an interesting topic into the gutter. I don't want any part of it. That is not what PT is about. I don't take a word of it personally, it is just tiresome, not constructive and not useful.

I teach thousands of beginner photographers. Thousands more come onto this forum for advice. Working with beginner photographers is my passion in life. It is something I have had many years of experience with and I am very good at it. It irks me to see them being misled because of personal preferences.

There is a world of difference between a personal preference and a sound technical reason. Sound technical reasons have no need to be bolstered with abuse and insults. Personal preferences often do.

There is no technical difference between MM and SP or AP if you are using the meter in the camera to line up your aperture or shutter speed. The camera is making the initial decision in all cases. There is no technical difference between adjusting your shutter speed in MM or using Exp Comp in AP. It is technically identical with the exception that MM is slower by definition.

I was asking for technical reasons for 'always' shooting in MM in case I missed something and, in the event that I received new information, I would change what I say in class. So far I have only been given misconceptions yet, I remain open to new information. Enlighten me. I will pass it on.

Perhaps we could word this differently so that nobody feels it is a personal affront. How about telling me a single specific scenario where shooting in MM would be technically superior to shooting in AP or SP? This, as a discussion, could then be useful to people coming here from around the world hoping to learn.

william_cpa wrote:

Alan Nunez wrote: Are you talking about bracketing? If so then bracket in camera. I don't use EC as it is easy to accidentally leave it on the wrong setting. I simply use my manual exposure and dial in the over & under shot. If I was shooting interiors and needed to do a bunch of bracketed shots I would use the built in bracketing function in the body,

And what if you accidentally leave on the built in bracketing function on the body? 

1. I would hear the multiple exposures when I fire the trigger
2. I  still end up with the correct exposure in the set unlike if my metering has one or 2 stops over exposed in the EC.

NOTE: My reply was simply how I would do it and why I choose this method. There are other ways to achieve the same result. Find what works for you.
 

KCook wrote:

william_cpa wrote:

Alan Nunez wrote: Are you talking about bracketing? If so then bracket in camera. I don't use EC as it is easy to accidentally leave it on the wrong setting. I simply use my manual exposure and dial in the over & under shot. If I was shooting interiors and needed to do a bunch of bracketed shots I would use the built in bracketing function in the body,

And what if you accidentally leave on the built in bracketing function on the body? 

I do a fair amount of AE bracketing (lazy photographer).  If the "drive" on my Canon is in Continuous mode, no problem, I will hear the shutter fire off the second shot.  But if the drive is in single frame mode, that can be a real gotcha when you forget the bracketing is turned on.  I wish Canon did not even allow bracketing in single frame mode, but then there are lots of things I wish for.

Kelly

Good Point Kelly...I had not thought of that. I almost always use continuous drive when I am bracketing but if I was on single it would be a real problem if I forgot to change it back.

I will watch out for this.

william_cpa wrote:

Joves wrote:

william_cpa wrote: It's the same old aggressive, defensive responses. I had thought that you would be bringing something new to the topic. I apologize for asking. I won't be adding to this thread any further.

 
In forums you have to be very thick skinned.
Now as to why some of us prefer to shoot in manual only is, because it is what we like, and because we know that we know better than the manufacturer. I think I used Aperture Mode like 3, or 4 years ago. With my Nikon it Over Exposes in bright lighting conditions, so I either have you use EC to compensate for it, or better yet, I use Manual Mode without EC, and expose it correctly by under exposing it.
So my question is which is easier in reality?
Me having to set the EC for a mode to get proper exposure, or being able to do it as I shoot? Also if as Adrian pointed out if I want to maintain a certain SS range, with a given Aperture/s, then the only thing I have to do is change the ISO. Or actually start with a higher ISO, especially true if you are dealing with changing lighting conditions.
The reason I use MM all the time is that it makes me feel as though I am a part of the process in making an image. Or actually that I am making the image how I want it. Maybe that is the old film shooter in me, in that I never needed all of the camera helping me outside of some having meters. When AF first came along, I never even got into that. Until I went digital I was shooting with my Pentax MX. The only thing that the battery is for is the meter. So I find it strange you wonder why some of us only like that way of shooting.
I do not care how you shoot, or what you shoot with. But you also have your own air of abrasiveness towards those of us who think the Auto Modes are crap. There is room for everyone to shoot how they like to, without thinking one group are snobs, or elitists for choosing to shoot MM. Or for those of us as MM shooters to see those who use those Modes as inferior. All that matters in the end is the images we get, and that we enjoy photography.

OK I'm back. I got suckered into this reply. Again an aggressive response above. I don't care what anyone posts, aggressive or otherwise. I am just disappointed that some will seek to drag an interesting topic into the gutter. I don't want any part of it. That is not what PT is about. I don't take a word of it personally, it is just tiresome, not constructive and not useful.

I teach thousands of beginner photographers. Thousands more come onto this forum for advice. Working with beginner photographers is my passion in life. It is something I have had many years of experience with and I am very good at it. It irks me to see them being misled because of personal preferences.

There is a world of difference between a personal preference and a sound technical reason. Sound technical reasons have no need to be bolstered with abuse and insults. Personal preferences often do.

There is no technical difference between MM and SP or AP if you are using the meter in the camera to line up your aperture or shutter speed. The camera is making the initial decision in all cases. There is no technical difference between adjusting your shutter speed in MM or using Exp Comp in AP. It is technically identical with the exception that MM is slower by definition.

I was asking for technical reasons for 'always' shooting in MM in case I missed something and, in the event that I received new information, I would change what I say in class. So far I have only been given misconceptions yet, I remain open to new information. Enlighten me. I will pass it on.

Perhaps we could word this differently so that nobody feels it is a personal affront. How about telling me a single specific scenario where shooting in MM would be technically superior to shooting in AP or SP? This, as a discussion, could then be useful to people coming here from around the world hoping to learn.

Wow didn't this tread get messy! Ok here is my opinion (an it is only my opinion)...

All the modes use the same in-camera metering and there are multiple ways to get the same result. I have a few years under my belt as a professional photographer and I know I may get some hate mail for my next statement but go with me for a moment.... I shoot on "P" and often jokingly refer to it as P for Professional, I also shoot in Manual, shutter priority and aperture priority depending on what I am shooting however I have spend many (too many to count) shooting in Manual only as it is only in recent years that the in-camera metering systems have become fantastic. In those year I learnt how to meter by eye. When I let the camera choose my settings for me I always look at it before I take the shot, if it is not where I think it needs to be I dial in a correction by switching to manual (could just as easily be achieved with EC). Call me old fashion but I still can't wrap my head around letting the camera choose my ISO but that is just me. I dial in my ISO based on what I am shooting and it generally stays there. 

I think the debate is academic, Do what works for you but understand exposure and how the different options between aperture, shutter speed and ISO impact on your image. I still love pulling out my FM2 and shooting with a basic metering system and manual setting but I also love the fact that my D3 has the technology to make my life easier today! 

P.S. Everyone need to take a CHILL PILL

I appreciate your even handed approach to the subject. I don't quite understand why you mention auto ISO which has no connection to EC, AP or SP and I am sure you have a reason.

This discussion is very likely more than academic to thousands of new photographers who come to PT to learn. If they can learn the benefits or otherwise of the different available modes then they can make their own personal choice about what works for them rather than be told that AP or SP are crap.

Technical differences between modes cannot be described as a personal preference. Either there are differences or there are not. I am struggling to see how that could be an opinion rather than a simple technical fact. I am asking about technical differences only.

I want to know of a single scenario in ambient light where using MM is technically superior to AP or SP without the use of an incident meter. I think that is an important piece of information for any photographer, beginner or otherwise. In what scenario can I take a better picture in MM? If it is possible, technically, then great! Awesome! Everybody learns something huge. If it is not possible then great! Awesome! Everybody learns something huge. Win Win! There can be no losers in this discussion.

BTW you can catch me chatting with Alex, the founder of PT, over on the 'learn and explore' section discussing getting started in photography:

Learn and Explore